> > I'm still not sold. The present polarity seems more intuitive, to me. Just
> > my opinion.
> 
> Well, I'll concede you that, no problem.  There are a few points in the
> package system that are unintuitive, always.
>
> I would just like to avoid the shift because it falls under the heading of 
> gratuitous difference that will do nothing but confuse users that use both 
> systems...
 
It doesn't matter to the users what the variables are called - it's
the people who create the package Makefiles in the first place who
are the ones that will have to deal with this, not the users. As
far as I can see, it doesn't impact the users at all.  Frankly, if
the OpenBSD crowd aren't up to using a script, or even sed(1), to
change a variable name to their way of doing it, that's their
problem.

> If it were six months ago, and you were discussing the same matter on
> ports@openbsd.org, I would be very willing to shift.  However, gratuitously
> changing 800 Makefiles at the moment is out of the question for us.

Fine, so you'd like us to implement something that a number of us
consider to be inappropriate because OpenBSD took a decision 6
months ago to do it that way? And, if we don't use the OpenBSD
method, because we didn't get to voice our opinions on the matter,
the NetBSD packages people will be creating gratuitous differences?

"Yeah, right."